On 21.02.2011 04:50, Paul Cotton wrote:
> ISSUE-125: charset-vs-quotes - Straw Poll for Objections
>
> The poll is available here and it will run through Monday Feb 28th:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-125-objection-poll/
>
> Please read the introductory text before entering your response.
>
> In particular, keep in mind that you don't *have* to reply. You only
> need to do so if you feel your objection to one of the options is truly
> strong, and has not been adequately addressed by a clearly marked
> objection contained within a Change Proposal or by someone else's
> objection. The Chairs will be looking at strength of objections, and
> will not be counting votes.
>
> /paulc
> ...
Hi,
a comment on Philip's objection in
<http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-125-objection-poll/results>:
> ...
> More importantly, the suggested change does not appear to actually align the spec with RFC2616, which was the whole point. Here's my reading:
>
> 1. Start at Content-Type <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-14.17>
> 2. Follow reference to Media Types <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-3.7>
> 3. Find "Parameters MAY follow the type/subtype in the form of attribute/value pairs (as defined in section 3.6)" It says MAY, so I would really stop here, saying that HTTP doesn't define how to parse parameters of Content-Type.
How so? You seem to have a strange understanding about what MAY/OPTIONAL
means.
> 4. Ignore the MAY and follow the reference to Transfer Codings <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-3.6>
> 5. Follow the reference to quoted-string in <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-2.2>
>
> We've arrived at:
>
> quoted-string = ( <"> *(qdtext | quoted-pair ) <"> )
> qdtext = <any TEXT except <">>
> quoted-pair = "\" CHAR
>
> Since the suggested change doesn't handle the backslash-escaping mechanism, it is failing to 'parse quotes in Content-Type headers in "meta" elements in a HTTP compliant manner', so it would not be appropriate remove the willful violation note based on the reasoning in this CP.
Implementing backslash-escaping is a separate issue (ISSUE-126). I have
tried to treat these as orthogonal issues, and the CP is pretty clear
about that.
Best regards, Julian